两种新药方案治疗进展期胃癌成本效益比较

目的:比较TCF方案治疗48例进展期胃癌(AGC)患者的疗效、不良反应及成本效益。方法:全组48例,其中TCF组22例,FOLFOX4组26例。化疗至少2个周期后评价疗效及不良反应。并进一步计算疾病控制成本。结果:TCF组有效率是50.0%,FOLFOX4组有效率为46.1%(P>0.05)。TCF组的中位疾病进展时间(TTP)为5.8月;FOLFOX4组的中位TTP为5.1月(P>0.05)。在Ⅲ、Ⅳ级毒性中,TCF组的恶心呕吐(44.7%)、脱发(16.4%)较为突出,神经毒性明显低于FOLFOX4组(18.7%)(P<0.05)。患者疾病控制期间每月所需成本为6 023.13元(TCF组)与6 150.04元(FOLFOX4组)。结论:TCF方案以较少的化疗周期获得与FOLFOX4方案相似的中位TTP,在一定程度上节约了医疗成本,值得进一步研究。

Cost Effectiveness Analyses of 2 Schemes for Advanced Gastric Cancer

OBJECTIVE: To compare the curative effects of TCF and FOLFOX4 for 48 patients with advanced gastric cancer.METHODS: Of a total of 48 cases,22 were assigned to receive TCF and 26 to receive FOLFOX4.The curative effects and adverse drug reactions of 2 groups were evahuated and the costs for disease control of the 2 were calculated.RESULTS: The effective rates of TCF group and FOLFOX4 group were 50.0% and 46.1%,respectively(P>0.05),and the median TTP of the 2 groups was 5.8 months and 5.1 months,respectively(P>0.05).WHO grade 3 or 4 toxicities in TCF group were characterized by nausea and vomiting(44.7%)and Alopecia(16.4%),and the neurotoxicity in this group was significantly lower than in FOLFOX4 group(18.7%)(P>0.05).The monthly cost for discasc control was $6 023.13 in TCF group and $6 150.04 in FOLFOX4 group.CONCLUSION: TTP scheme is able to achieve the similar median as in FOLFOX4 group with less chemotherapy cycle so that the medical cost was saved,yet which remains to be further studied.